1. Field
The disclosed embodiments relate to electrical stimulation therapy for neurological disorders, and more particularly to applying different types of therapy to treat different types of neurological events.
2. Background
Epilepsy, a neurological disorder characterized by the occurrence of seizures (specifically episodic impairment or loss of consciousness, abnormal motor phenomena, psychic or sensory disturbances, or the perturbation of the autonomic nervous system), is debilitating to a great number of people. It is believed that as many as two to four million Americans may suffer from various forms of epilepsy. Research has found that its prevalence may be even greater worldwide, particularly in less economically developed nations, suggesting that the worldwide figure for epilepsy sufferers may be in excess of one hundred million.
Because epilepsy is characterized by seizures, its sufferers are frequently limited in the kinds of activities they may participate in. Epilepsy can prevent people from driving, working, or otherwise participating in much of what society has to offer. Some epilepsy sufferers have serious seizures so frequently that they are effectively incapacitated.
Furthermore, epilepsy is often progressive and can be associated with degenerative disorders and conditions. Over time, epileptic seizures often become more frequent and more serious, and in particularly severe cases, are likely to lead to deterioration of other brain functions (including cognitive function) as well as physical impairments.
The current state of the art in treating neurological disorders, particularly epilepsy, typically involves drug therapy and surgery. The first approach is usually drug therapy.
A number of drugs are approved and available for treating epilepsy, such as sodium valproate, phenobarbital/primidone, ethosuximide, gabapentin, phenytoin, and carbamazepine, as well as a number of others. Unfortunately, those drugs typically have serious side effects, especially toxicity, and it is extremely important in most cases to maintain a precise therapeutic serum level to avoid breakthrough seizures (if the dosage is too low) or toxic effects (if the dosage is too high). The need for patient discipline is high, especially when a patient's drug regimen causes unpleasant side effects the patient may wish to avoid.
Moreover, while many patients respond well to drug therapy alone, a significant number (at least 20-30%) do not. For those patients, surgery is presently the best-established and most viable alternative course of treatment.
Currently practiced surgical approaches include radical surgical resection such as hemispherectomy, corticectomy, lobectomy and partial lobectomy, and less-radical lesionectomy, transection, and stereotactic ablation. Besides being less than fully successful, these surgical approaches generally have a high risk of complications, and can often result in damage to eloquent (i.e., functionally important) brain regions and the consequent long-term impairment of various cognitive and other neurological functions. Furthermore, for a variety of reasons, such surgical treatments are contraindicated in a substantial number of patients. And unfortunately, even after radical brain surgery, many epilepsy patients are still not seizure-free.
Electrical stimulation is an emerging therapy for treating epilepsy. However, currently approved and available electrical stimulation devices apply continuous electrical stimulation to neural tissue surrounding or near implanted electrodes, and do not perform any detection—they are not responsive to relevant neurological conditions.
The NeuroCybernetic Prosthesis (NCP) from Cyberonics, for example, applies continuous electrical stimulation to the patient's vagus nerve. This approach has been found to reduce seizures by about 50% in about 50% of patients. Unfortunately, a much greater reduction in the incidence of seizures is needed to provide clinical benefit. The Activa device from Medtronic is a pectorally implanted continuous deep brain stimulator intended primarily to treat Parkinson's disease; it has also been tested for epilepsy. In operation, it supplies a continuous electrical pulse stream to a selected deep brain structure where an electrode has been implanted.
Continuous stimulation of deep brain structures for the treatment of epilepsy has not met with consistent success. To be effective in terminating seizures, it is believed that one effective site where stimulation should be performed is near the focus of the epileptogenic region of the brain. The focus is often in the neocortex, where continuous stimulation may cause significant neurological deficit with clinical symptoms including loss of speech, sensory disorders; or involuntary motion. Accordingly, research has been directed toward automatic responsive epilepsy treatment based on a detection of imminent seizure.
The episodic attacks or seizures experienced by a typical epilepsy patient are characterized by periods of abnormal neurological activity. “Epileptiform” activity refers to specific neurological activity associated with epilepsy as well as with an epileptic seizure and its precursors; such activity is frequently manifested in electrographic signals in the patient's brain.
Most prior work on the detection and responsive treatment of seizures via electrical stimulation has focused on analysis of electroencephalogram (EEG) and electrocorticogram (ECoG) waveforms. In general, EEG signals represent aggregate neuronal activity potentials detectable via electrodes applied to a patient's scalp, and ECoGs use internal electrodes near the surface of or within the brain. ECoG signals, deep-brain counterparts to EEG signals, are detectable via electrodes implanted on the dura mater, under the dura mater, or via depth electrodes (and the like) within the patient's brain. Unless the context clearly and expressly indicates otherwise, the term “EEG” shall be used generically herein to refer to both EEG and ECoG signals.
It is generally preferable to be able to detect and treat a seizure at or near its beginning, or even before it begins. The beginning of a seizure is referred to herein as an “onset.” However, it is important to note that there are two general varieties of seizure onsets. A “clinical onset” represents the beginning of a seizure as manifested through observable clinical symptoms, such as involuntary muscle movements or neurophysiological effects such as lack of responsiveness. An “electrographic onset” refers to the beginning of detectable electrographic activity indicative of a seizure. An electrographic onset will frequently occur before the corresponding clinical onset, enabling intervention before the patient suffers symptoms, but that is not always the case. In addition, there often are perceptible changes in the EEG, or “precursors,” that occur seconds or even minutes before the electrographic onset that can be identified and used to facilitate intervention before electrographic or clinical onsets occur. This capability would be considered seizure prediction, in contrast to the detection of a seizure or its onset.
It has been suggested that it is possible to treat and terminate seizures by applying specific responsive electrical stimulation signals to the brain. See, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 6,016,449 to Fischell) et al., H. R. Wagner, et al., Suppression of Cortical Epileptiform Activity by Generalized and Localized ECoG Desynchronization, Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. 1975; 39(5): 499-506; and R. P. Lesser et al., Brief Bursts of Pulse Stimulation Terminate After discharges Caused by Cortical Stimulation, Neurology 1999; 53 (December): 2073-81. Unlike the continuous stimulation approaches, described above, responsive stimulation is intended to be performed only when a seizure (or other undesired neurological event) is occurring or about to occur. This approach is believed to be preferable to continuous or semi-continuous stimulation, as stimulation at inappropriate times and quantities may) result in the initiation of seizures, an increased susceptibility to seizures, or other undesired side effects. Responsive stimulation, on the other hand, tends to avoid side effects, to avoid undesired habituating and conditioning (learning) effects on the brain, and to prolong the battery life of an implantable device.
While responsive stimulation alone is considered an advantageous therapy for seizures, it is believed possible to further reduce the incidence of seizures by applying continuous or periodic scheduled stimulation to certain parts of the brain while also performing responsive electrical stimulation as described above. See, for example, U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/543,450 filed on Apr. 5, 2000; U.S. Pat. No. 5,683,422 to Rise; and I. S. Cooper et al., “Effects of Cerebellar Stimulation on Epilepsy, the EEG and Cerebral. Palsy in Man,” Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. 1978; 34: 349-54. Drug therapy, either continuous or applied by an implantable device upon demand or on a schedule, is also believed to be a useful adjunct to responsive and programmed electrical stimulation.
Current approaches to responsive stimulation have certain obvious drawbacks. In general, the need to apply responsive therapy indicates that a seizure or other event is imminent or already occurring, which might have adverse implications for the patient. Accordingly, it would be preferable to be able to detect events and conditions that precede seizures and treat them less aggressively, thereby discouraging the seizure from ever occurring.
Moreover, seizures (and other events) and their onsets almost always differ in some way—with different types, locations, and characteristics in different individuals, and also frequently between multiple events in the same individual. Finally, it should be recognized that certain treatments, and specifically certain kinds of stimulation might not work well for all of a patient's seizures, and in some cases, might even exacerbate some seizures. A Boolean responsive treatment strategy (i.e., a choice between applying one kind of therapy and not applying therapy at all) may not be effective in certain patients, and does not provide much of a structured course of treatment for episodes of varying severity.
Accordingly, and for the reasons set forth above, it is desirable to be able to apply the best possible therapy for each of a patient's episodes of epileptiform activity or other symptoms. Such therapy would have an increased chance of disrupting epileptiform activity, thereby avoiding, terminating, or lessening the severity of the patient's seizure disorder